| Literature DB >> 33264367 |
Yigizie Yeshaw1,2, Misganaw Gebrie Worku3, Zemenu Tadesse Tessema2, Achamyeleh Birhanu Teshale2, Getayeneh Antehunegn Tesema2.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Diarrhea is the leading cause of illness and death among under-five children in low and middle income countries. Through the provision of zinc supplements has been shown to reduce the severity and duration of diarrhea, as well as the risk of mortality, the use of zinc for the treatment of diarrhea is still very low in low-income countries. Therefore, this study was conducted to determine the prevalence and associated factors of zinc utilization among under-five children with diarrhea in East Africa.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33264367 PMCID: PMC7710063 DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0243245
Source DB: PubMed Journal: PLoS One ISSN: 1932-6203 Impact factor: 3.240
Fig 1Conceptual framework for zinc utilization as the management of diarrhea among under-five children in East Africa [21–30].
Sociodemographic characteristics of respondents in East Africa.
| Variables | Weighted frequency | Percent |
|---|---|---|
| Residence | ||
| Urban | 3,322 | 19.68 |
| Rural | 13,553 | 80.32 |
| Sex of child | ||
| Male | 8,958 | 53.08 |
| Female | 7,917 | 46.92 |
| Sex of household head | ||
| Male | 12,816 | 75.95 |
| Female | 4,059 | 24.05 |
| Marital status | ||
| Never married | 681 | 4.04 |
| Currently married | 14,432 | 85.52 |
| Formerly married | 1, 762 | 10.44 |
| Highest maternal education attended | ||
| No education | 3,810 | 22.58 |
| Primary education | 9,248 | 54.80 |
| Secondary education | 3,375 | 20.00 |
| Higher education | 442 | 2.62 |
| Wealth index | ||
| Low | 7,988 | 47.34 |
| Middle | 3,232 | 19.15 |
| High | 5,655 | 33.51 |
| Media exposure | ||
| Yes | 10,805 | 64.03 |
| No | 6,070 | 35.97 |
| Community education level | ||
| Low | 8,401 | 49.78 |
| High | 8,474 | 50.22 |
| Community poverty level | ||
| Low | 8,737 | 51.77 |
| High | 8,138 | 48.23 |
| Community media exposure level | ||
| High | 8,476 | 50.23 |
| Low | 8,399 | 49.77 |
Model comparison and random effect analysis results.
| Parameters | Null model | Model I | Model II | Model III |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Community-level variance | 0.0455 | 0.0456 | 0.0471 | 0.0470 |
| ICC | 1.36% | 1.37% | 1.41% | 1.41% |
| MOR | 1.225 | 1.225 | 1.229 | 1.229 |
| PCV | Ref | 0.22% | 3.52% | 3.30% |
| Deviance(-2LL) | 18052.8804 | 17973.077 | 18040.7422 | 17960.2928 |
ICC: Intra Class Correlation Coefficient, MOR: Median Odds Ratio, PCV: Proportional Change in Variance.
Prevalence of zinc utilization among under-five children with diarrhea in East African countries.
| Country | Zinc utilization | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| No | Yes | Total number of children with diarrhea | |
| N (%) | N (%) | ||
| Burundi | 2,440(84.95) | 432(15.05) | 2,872 |
| Ethiopia | 807(66.39) | 409(33.61) | 1,216 |
| Kenya | 2,604(91.85) | 231(8.15) | 2,835 |
| Comoros | 489(99.56) | 2(0.44) | 491 |
| Madagascar | 960(98.60) | 14(1.40) | 974 |
| Malawi | 2,545(71.62) | 1,008(28.38) | 3,554 |
| Tanzania | 919(82.44) | 196(17.56) | 1,115 |
| Uganda | 1,675(59.49) | 1,140(40.51) | 2,815 |
| Zimbabwe | 802(79.89) | 202(20.11) | 1,004 |
Multilevel regression analysis of zinc utilization among under-five children with acute diarrhea in East Africa.
| Zinc utilization | Prevalence ratio | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Variables | Yes | No | uPR | aPR |
| N (%) | N (%) | (95% CI) | (95% CI) | |
| Education level | ||||
| No education | 666 (17.49) | 3,144 (82.51) | 1 | 1 |
| 1ry education | 2,026(21.90) | 7,222 (78.10) | 1.27(1.14–1.40) | 1.29(1.16–1.44) |
| 2ry education | 791(23.44) | 2,584 (76.56) | 1.38(1.22–1.55) | 1.36(1.19–1.55) |
| Higher education | 151 (34.24) | 291 (65.76) | 1.98(1.60–2.45) | 1.91(1.52–2.40) |
| Community education | ||||
| Low | 1,802 (21.45) | 6,599 (78.55) | 1 | 1 |
| High | 1,832 (21.62) | 6,642 (78.38) | 1.06(0.97–1.16) | 1.12(1.02–1.24) |
| Community poverty | ||||
| High | 1,694 (20.82) | 6,444 (79.18) | 1 | 1 |
| Low | 1,940 (22.20) | 6,797 (77.80) | 1.10(1.01–1.19) | 1.08(0.98–1.18) |
| Wealth index | ||||
| Poor | 1,597 (19.99) | 6,391 (80.01) | 1 | 1 |
| Middle | 673 (20.83) | 2,559 (79.17) | 1.05(0.95–1.17) | 1.01(0.91–1.13) |
| High | 1,364 (24.12) | 4,291(75.88) | 1.22(1.12–1.34) | 1.12(1.01–1.24) |
| Community media exposure | ||||
| Low | 1,862 (22.18) | 6,537 (77.82) | 1 | 1 |
| High | 1,772(20.90) | 6,704 (79.10) | 1.11(1.01–1.21) | 1.17(1.06–1.29) |
| Media exposure | ||||
| Yes | 2,400 (22.21) | 8,405 (77.79) | 1.11(1.02–1.20) | 1.03(0.94–1.13) |
| No | 1,234 (20.34) | 4,836 (79.66) | 1 | 1 |
*p≤0.05, uPR: Unadjusted Prevalence Ratio, aPR: Adjusted Prevalence Ratio, CI: Confidence Interval.